JAMES FREBER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Freber appealed the denial of his motion to vacate his guilty plea and sentence under Florida Rule 3.850, claiming inadequate plea colloquy and lack of inquiry into potential defenses. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's denial, finding no prejudice or manifest injustice despite procedural deficiencies in the plea process.
Although the plea colloquy fell short of Rule 3.172 requirements in multiple respects, the judgment and sentence should not be invalidated because Freber failed to prove prejudice or manifest injustice. The deportation warning omission was harmless given Freber's U.S. citizenship.
[1] A defendant seeking to vacate a guilty plea on collateral review must demonstrate prejudice or manifest injustice, even if the plea colloquy was deficient.
[2] A factual basis for a guilty plea cannot be established solely by counsel's stipulation to the probable cause affidavit.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“although the plea colloquy fell short of the requirements set out in rule 3.172, the judgment and sentence should not be invalidated on collateral review, as Appellant has not proved prejudice or manifest injustice”
Establishes the core holding that procedural deficiencies in the plea process do not warrant vacation absent proof of prejudice or manifest injustice.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFreber entered a guilty plea and was sentenced, with the trial court apparently applying habitual offender sentencing enhancement. At the evidentiary …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Deportation Consequences cases and more on FLexlaw
STONE, Judge.
We affirm an order denying Appellant’s motion for relief under rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, to vacate his sentence and to withdraw his guilty plea. There is record support for the trial court’s conclusion that Appellant was advised of, and understood the terms of the plea agreement and the rights relinquished by his plea.
Appellant contends that the court’s inquiry was cursory and that he was not advised of the minimum sentence he might have received had the court elected not to sentence him as a habitual offender. Although he was told what percentage of his sentence he would have to serve, this percentage was not converted into “real” years for him. Appellant also contends that more extensive questioning by the trial court would have uncovered the possibility of an intoxication defense.
The state correctly notes that even if the plea inquiry was minimal, Appellant has failed to demonstrate prejudice or manifest injustice. Panno v. State, 517 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987), rev. denied, 525 So. 2d 880 (Fla.1988).
With respect to the plea being voluntarily and intelligently entered, the record reflects that there was sufficient evidence presented at the evidentiary hearing on Appellant’s motion to vacate to determine Appellant’s understanding, intelligence, and comprehension. See Ream v. State, 449 So. 2d 960 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984).
The one demonstrated error is the court’s failure to elicit a factual basis for the plea. See Mack v. State, 616 So. 2d 109 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Rule 3.172(a), Fla.R.Crim.P. See also Koenig v. State, 597 So. 2d 256 (Fla.1992); Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla.1975). The only factual basis appearing in the record is counsel’s stipulation that a conviction could have resulted if a jury believed the facts set forth in the probable cause affidavit. This is an insufficient record for a factual basis, notwithstanding that an officer’s affidavit was submitted to the court. Koenig.
We recognize that the record also reflects the court’s failure to advise Appellant of potential deportation consequences. However, this is patently harmless as the record also demonstrates his U.S. citizenship.
In all, although the plea colloquy fell short of the requirements set out in rule 3.172, the judgment and sentence should not be invalidated on collateral review, as Appellant has not proved prejudice or manifest injustice. Williams v. State, 534 So. 2d 929 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Panno.
Therefore, the judgment and sentence are affirmed.
DELL, C.J., and HERSEY, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Will, 645 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)…” Similarly, the Florida Supreme Court has held that after sentence is imposed, a plea is not to be vacated unless there is a showing of prejudice or manifest injustice. Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267, 273-75 (Fla.1975); see also Freber v. State, 638 So. 2d 140, 141 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Suarez v. State, 616 So. 2d 1067, 1068 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). II Defendant asserted, inter alia, that the plea should be set aside because there was no on-the-record waiver of the right to a habitual offender hearing under s…
-
Guevara v. State, 647 So. 2d 887 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)…ual factual basis for the plea or alternatively, for the trial court to attach to the order portions of the record, including the probable cause affidavit, conclusively refuting defendant’s claims for post-conviction relief. Compare Freber v. State, 638 So. 2d 140 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). DELL, C.J., and GUNTHER, J., concur.…
-
Javaro K. Thomas v. State, 657 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…“going through a lot of stress,” and now “just [thought he] made the wrong decision.” To prevail on his motion to withdraw plea, Thomas must demonstrate prejudice or manifest injustice. Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla.1975); Freber v. State, 638 So. 2d 140, 141 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). He has not met that burden here. The record supports the trial court’s conclusion that the plea was voluntarily and intelligently entered. Cf. Freber, 638 So. 2d at 141. In sentencing Thomas as an adult, however, the trial…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1975)
- Koenig v. State, 597 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 1992)
- Williams v. State, 534 So. 2d 929 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)
- Ream v. State, 449 So. 2d 960 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
- Panno v. State, 517 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)
- Mack v. State, 616 So. 2d 109 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)